Questionable Camos

M45 said:
SD LUFT CAMO

This appears to be a camo using tan, red-brown and Luft blue gray mixed with sand. Extremely unusual to see Luft blue gray used in a field camo scheme and not as a depot reissue, IMO. Extremely unusual = extremely improbable. Tan is bright and vibrant, not dull and faded after 70 years. Decal shot shows pristine condition of sand and bubbling paint. Essentially no combat wear in that shot. Bubbles may have been caused by applied heat. Another nice original turned into a movie prop, IMO.
Click to expand...

In My Honest Opinion, I see absolutely nothing wrong with the the age of the colours - The tan is not vibrant, it is exactly like the red-brown and green colours, dull and faded and my feeling is that all colours were applied at the same time. In some cases the lighting source can severely effect the true impression of the final picture. Rust areas look old and not fresh.

Camo scheme - Unusual (yes) = improbable (can not say), it is not impossible, you are making assumptions based upon your personal feelings and not talking facts. (facts in many cases are difficult to determine due to supply issues and the use of what was available at the time to do a job).

Wear and tear, knocks and chips intermittent on the crown again in my opinion look good. As mentioned liner is of minimal wear, that passes perfectly with the wear on the helmet (IMO).
One could only say the helmet has not seen extensive 'combat' service, only moderate.

Again if 'Ruffin' is reading, his expertise of 'creating' camouflage reproductions and his opinions on the techniques that are in use would be useful to clarify some points of discussion.

To me this is an unusual and very attractive helmet..just my opinion.

EF
 
Eurofighter said:
In My Honest Opinion, I see absolutely nothing wrong with the the age of the colours - The tan is not vibrant, it is exactly like the red-brown and green colours, dull and faded and my feeling is that all colours were applied at the same time. In some cases the lighting source can severely effect the true impression of the final picture. Rust areas look old and not fresh.

Camo scheme - Unusual (yes) = improbable (can not say), it is not impossible, you are making assumptions based upon your personal feelings and not talking facts. (facts in many cases are difficult to determine due to supply issues and the use of what was available at the time to do a job).

Wear and tear, knocks and chips intermittent on the crown again in my opinion look good. As mentioned liner is of minimal wear, that passes perfectly with the wear on the helmet (IMO).
One could only say the helmet has not seen extensive 'combat' service, only moderate.

Again if 'Ruffin' is reading, his expertise of 'creating' camouflage reproductions and his opinions on the techniques that are in use would be useful to clarify some points of discussion.

To me this is an unusual and very attractive helmet..just my opinion.

EF
Click to expand...


you are making assumptions based upon your personal feelings and not talking facts.

I agree that this is an unusual and very attractive helmet, but don't pay more than a restore price for it ($350 - $400). If you pay an original price for it ($3500 - $4000) you are wasting your money. Just my opinion based on my observations of questionable camos over the years (they are made to look very attractive).
 

Attachments

  • post-25416-0-60776700-1451658575.jpg
    post-25416-0-60776700-1451658575.jpg
    298 KB · Views: 46
  • post-25416-0-79992900-1451659798.jpg
    post-25416-0-79992900-1451659798.jpg
    328.1 KB · Views: 30
  • post-25416-0-57583500-1451659028.jpg
    post-25416-0-57583500-1451659028.jpg
    305.1 KB · Views: 43
This luft helmet looks nice and would display nice but it looks like someone painted over rust and that's bubbled the paint up and flaked off and left it pockmarked, could also be heat induced bubbling.
 
Eurofighter said:
Again if 'Ruffin' is reading, his expertise of 'creating' camouflage reproductions and his opinions on the techniques that are in use would be useful to clarify some points of discussion.

EF
Click to expand...

The Luft camo raises red flags IMO. While the wear looks pretty convincing, realistic looking paint chips are easier to fake on a textured surface. I'm also suspicious of what looks like brown oxidation along the edges of most of the paint chips. This is almost uniformly distributed across the helmet. While this can be the result of moisture during storage, it can also be created by chemical treatment over the helmet surface used to produce fake patina. In addition, the paint around the decal looks fresh. Those observations, the odd tan color, and the condition of the liner definitely puts this helmet in the "questionable camo" category. If I were looking to spend serious money on an original camo, it wouldn't be this one.
 
Last edited:
Eurofighter said:
In My Honest Opinion, I see absolutely nothing wrong with the the age of the colours - The tan is not vibrant, it is exactly like the red-brown and green colours, dull and faded and my feeling is that all colours were applied at the same time. In some cases the lighting source can severely effect the true impression of the final picture. Rust areas look old and not fresh.

Camo scheme - Unusual (yes) = improbable (can not say), it is not impossible, you are making assumptions based upon your personal feelings and not talking facts. (facts in many cases are difficult to determine due to supply issues and the use of what was available at the time to do a job).

Wear and tear, knocks and chips intermittent on the crown again in my opinion look good. As mentioned liner is of minimal wear, that passes perfectly with the wear on the helmet (IMO).
One could only say the helmet has not seen extensive 'combat' service, only moderate.

Again if 'Ruffin' is reading, his expertise of 'creating' camouflage reproductions and his opinions on the techniques that are in use would be useful to clarify some points of discussion.

To me this is an unusual and very attractive helmet..just my opinion.

EF
Click to expand...

I would call that luft helmet questionable, has some things I like, others I don't - maybe it's the pics!
 
Ruffin said:
The Luft camo raises red flags IMO. While the wear looks pretty convincing, realistic looking paint chips are easier to fake on a textured surface. I'm also suspicious of what looks like brown oxidation along the edges of most of the paint chips. This is almost uniformly distributed across the helmet. While this can be the result of moisture during storage, it can also be created by chemical treatment over the helmet surface used to produce fake patina. In addition, the paint around the decal looks fresh. Those observations, the odd tan color, and the condition of the liner definitely puts this helmet in the "questionable camo" category. If I were looking to spend serious money on an original camo, it wouldn't be this one.
Click to expand...

Thank you. Highly enlightening and useful analysis.
 
I was hoping you guys would chime in on this one. It definitely does not show extensive combat wear, but to me the colors look right and have a "flat" appearance to them. It does look like something Rex could create though. Thoughts?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_4029.jpg
    IMG_4029.jpg
    88.5 KB · Views: 45
  • IMG_4030.jpg
    IMG_4030.jpg
    113.1 KB · Views: 40
  • IMG_4031.jpg
    IMG_4031.jpg
    85 KB · Views: 40
  • IMG_4032.jpg
    IMG_4032.jpg
    102.1 KB · Views: 43
  • IMG_4033.jpg
    IMG_4033.jpg
    86.2 KB · Views: 39
  • IMG_4035.jpg
    IMG_4035.jpg
    112.7 KB · Views: 36
  • IMG_4036.jpg
    IMG_4036.jpg
    91.2 KB · Views: 28
doesn't have the same look as a "rex" job but as with any camo I would like to have It in hand to make the final assessment.
This one passes the 1st test for me.
 
mcorioles said:
I like it also.I think the word everyone is looking for is patina, not flatness.
Click to expand...

I'm taking "flat" to mean non-reflective, sort of. When you paint a wall, the paint is shiny until it dries. As it dries more, it gets a flatter look, the paint curing longer. Some paint being shown has the gloss look like its new, while other paint looks to have totally died off chemically. At least this is how I am reading it.
 
I agree this looks similar to my Normandy repaints. What I don't like about it is the rounded edges of a lot of the paint chips. Not saying it's fake, but it would require an in-hand inspection.
 
Ruffin said:
I agree this looks similar to my Normandy repaints. What I don't like about it is the rounded edges of a lot of the paint chips. Not saying it's fake, but it would require an in-hand inspection.
Click to expand...

I tend to notice in your spray patterns that there is a signature. Its the same on all. Not sure what type of gun you use.
 
nirvana said:
I'm taking "flat" to mean non-reflective, sort of. When you paint a wall, the paint is shiny until it dries. As it dries more, it gets a flatter look, the paint curing longer. Some paint being shown has the gloss look like its new, while other paint looks to have totally died off chemically. At least this is how I am reading it.
Click to expand...

Patina makes the paint "deadened" wipe it off,boom bright shiney camo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top